While reviewing the development of elasto-plastic models as well as damage theories, it is always stated that 2 types of damage theories exist and are respectively accepted in different applicational fields. Can anyone tell me the difference and their relationship between the micromechanical damage and the phenomenological damage (continuum damage) models?
Both want to describe the same effect using different methods. The phenomenological damage theory uses the methods of continuum theory on a more global (continuum) level.
Difference in scales. The difference in scales usually leads to difference of lows.
Micromechenicap approach also use experimantal results to describe the phenomenon of damage at microlevel.
In the ideal case you derive from the micromechanics damage criterion the macroscopic (phenomenological) damage criterion
They both are material constitutive law. Phenomenological models generally simulate the material behavior on the macro-scale level. In other words it concern about the stress strain relationship. On the other hand, micromechanical models indirectly model the stress strain relationship by representing the microstructure of the material. So the stress-strain relationship is indirect output to what happen on the microstructure level. As a result they are much accurate than phenomenological especially when it comes to interaction between different state of stresses. However they require much more computational capacity to represent the huge amount of data on the micro-structure level. Check my page, I have several paper that compare between the two methods and their applications in FE.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Mechanics